Gay wedding

[Scribe]

What if the man in Corinth that was sleeping with his Fathers wife decided to marry her and invited Paul? Would he go? (some say they were probably married but it still was considered a shameful sin) Or would Paul say what he said in the letter to the Corinthians about taking a stand for holiness about this issue and giving him over to satan for the destruction of the flesh.

"Not everyone who says to me, Lord, Lord is going to enter into the kingdom of heaven." Many will hate you for your love for Jesus, righteousness and true holiness. Even members of your own family will hate you for your obedience to Christ.

When The Lord comes back in fiery judgment taking vengeance on his adversaries and all those who spoke against him and were obstinate in their foolhardy rebellion against him, you will be justified in their eyes in that day when they see the glory of Christ revealed in you, the same glory that was seen in Christ on the mount of transfiguration, and when they see that your holy faith and your holy stance purchased a membership on that winning team! Then they will grievously regret, in that day, that they did not listen to you about such things as the judgment to come, when they asked you your opinion about their gay wedding.

 

[Susanna]

I don’t get this. I haven’t seen anyone advocating gay marriage here. Why is so many posters attacking that straw man?

 

[Susanna]

Some people on this thread are mockers, Ive found out. Mocking Christ.
They dont take Jesus Christ seriously and dont realise he died for them, that his blood was shed, for this kind of sin especially. In 1 corinthians 8:9 its clear, those who are unrepentant in this kind of sin will not inherit the Kingdom of God. In that letter Paul was writing not even to keep company with them, not to even to eat with them. Now why would he say this? Was Paul wrong and should he have said not its ok go hang out with them ..actually for one person he said put him away so that satan can take him to be destroyed so his spirit might be saved. Instead it seems they kept on with this wicked person who was fornicating with his fathers wife, and dividing the true brethren. It seems they couldnt judge even the smallest matters that this was the wrong thing!

The town of corinth back then was an anything goes kind of town.

Anyhow. Again, people dont seem to understand that theres nothing to be gained by hanging out with sinners, going to their parties and orgies and such where their sin is celebrated. If the person really is repentant, they will come to you, not the other way round. Should christians go to gay pride parades too? And hold up signs in support? Or even protest signs? No I reckon christians should stay well away from them.

They had this gay pride parade in my city which has been going for several years right. The gay organisers want the police there, but only if they are gay police who support them. The police actually are there to stop things getting hand whether they are gay ir not. So what happens is the gay organsiers wanted the police to dress up in gay costumes not actually do their job which is to be the police. Apparently there was this huge meltdown amongst the gay community about it. And the police dont want anything to do with gay politics they just want to do their job. Well they cant really have this parade without police presence as security.

Mocking Christ? Sounds like more along the lines of cheap rhetoric. I haven’t seen anyone mocking Christ here.

You’re right about one thing, though. They should not interfere in how law enforcement officers are organizing security.

 

[UnderGrace]

Amen regarding fellowship. The Roman/Greco world of the first century was filled with immorality far beyond that of today. The subject of the verse is fellowship. Don't fellowship with them to me means don't hang out with them. I agree.

So are you stating then you would go to a wedding reception or not...because you seem to be straddling two lanes and I am finding it a bit confusing?

 

[Mii]

You can get angry all you want MOTC but you're sharing false doctrine. Jimmy didn't preach this back in the day,if he is now he's preaching false doctrine.

I actually agree with him on this (specifically)...I just read this in one of John's Epistles.

In regards to well wishing of others when they are clearly living contrary to the word. It's actually a pretty cool connection that deserves further consideration.

Edit: Alas, quoting didn't include what you quoted

Basically not wishing someone God's Speed. Which seemingly is one of the few take aways from that particular Epistles. It's cool because I didn't know the word spoke specifically about that.

 

[UnderGrace]

so after a person is set free by the power of God and saved they still call themselves or identify with what Jesus saved them from?

That is unbiblical. heterosexual means like the opposite Homosexual is like the same kind or type. To manipulate two words to remove the context of sin and what God created man and women for is clearly more than heterosexual and homosexual.

Lust can sin sexually because of lust. identity is not a choice in context to gender that is deception. and a lie.

Very important to understand this what you state above ^^^^^^^ people definitely want to blur the lines, the gay community has done an excellent PR job stating it is intrinsic to who they are as a people..... there is no evidence for this!!

Quite the opposite, those that have been born again for the most part (some still battle the flesh) no longer argue it is their intrinsic neuroscience genetic programming they are encoded with, they typically get married and have families, that is the testimony they give.

 

[Lanolin]

I wouldn't know, I've never been to one. I just get angry a the obstruction of traffic and can't understand what they are proud of. They are a nuisance.

Well neither have I.

When gay people put huge billboards up advertising condoms with gay innuendo im like what.

I remmeber when the AIDS epidemic was scaring everyone, so condoms were advertised as safe sex, and grew up with high school teachers teaching that. They would say if you want to have sex, use a condom. It didnt matter who with, or what kind of sex. And in university, people were actively encourging students to 'experiment'.

When you are young you dont really know what that kind of 'lifestyle' means. All you see is the flashy clothes and outrageousness. One of my friends i remember unwittingly got involved she thought it was just like a fashion parade or something, to express wearing colourful attire. She said she went to it, to be in it even though she was not gay herself. Boy her mum didnt approve.

In my city theres a well known red light district that people unless they are there for whats on offer, know to keep well away from. Theres also a bunch of toilet blocks that are hangouts for gaymen to do their business. You would not ever want to go there cos going there almost guarantees youd get solicited or molested.

 

[calibob]

When I went to school we had 1-1hour sex education lesson and the teacher was using medical terms we never heard before or understand. USA had never lost a war and John Wayne was still making movies.

 

[Magenta]

nice list how many of them stayed or identified with their sin? and being small is not a sin just saying LOLand eating locust is not a sin either cover them with chocolate

They were listed as weaknesses, to show the infallibility of all men, which Scriptures confirms in multiple ways, necessarily including Biblical heroes who are still known for their sins as well as triumphs. I did not say eating locusts was a sin. The word weakness was at the beginning and end of the list, with Scripture provided using the very same word... not sin. Responding to what I actually post works better for me. John living in the desert and subsisting on locusts and honey... people no doubt thought he was quite an oddball. Being an outsider is seen as a weakness by some, just as not being attractive is seen as a disadvantage. Those people are forever known in this present world for their weaknesses, oddities, disadvantages, and yes, their recorded SINS too, as well as their triumphs. You may have missed the context, which was about the fallibility of humans. Paul identified as a sinner in the present tense, and not just as a sinner, but as the worst of sinners. Chocolate is not mentioned in the Bible as far as I know

 

[Magenta]

you did not see where I said "God doesn't want any to perish" that is from John 3:16 in the NKJV & KJV

Not in the post to which I responded, no, as I said I double checked and went back again now to see which one it was:

I can tell you that no one who practices such sin will receive heaven. If they are saved they are not gay anymore. No knowing one's outcome does not mean we are not to speak the word of God in truth and love. We are not to be ashamed of HIS Gospel it is the power of God for salvation

It is simply not here.

 

[Ohm]

Very important to understand this what you state above ^^^^^^^ people definitely want to blur the lines, the gay community has done an excellent PR job stating it is intrinsic to who they are as a people..... there is no evidence for this!!

Quite the opposite, those that have been born again for the most part (some still battle the flesh) no longer argue it is their intrinsic neuroscience genetic programming they are encoded with, they typically get married and have families, that is the testimony they give.

From a purely scientific perspective, there is an innate neurological preference for the same sex in homosexual men. That says nothing about belief and faith, that's just objective evidence. Neither political nor representational. Just a fact.

 

[UnderGrace]

From a purely scientific perspective, there is an innate neurological preference for the same sex in homosexual men.

Behaviour/sin changes brains...so this proves nothing.

 

[Ohm]

Behaviour/sin changes brains...so this proves nothing.

It proves that biological responses associated with attraction are triggered in self-identified homosexual men whenever they see eroticized images of other men, but not when they see such images of women. Attraction is, of course, an innate, instinctive phenomenon. I don't see a woman and choose to be attracted to her, I am simply attracted to her. And this scientific study proves that the same is true for homosexual men as they view other men.

Again, that says nothing about faith, or politics, or any of that. It's just a scientific observation. This link was a response to someone who said there are no innate neurological correlates for homosexuality. This study shows otherwise.

Just here for the facts.

 

[UnderGrace]

From a purely scientific perspective, there is an innate neurological preference for the same sex in homosexual men. That says nothing about belief and faith, that's just objective evidence. Neither political nor representational. Just a fact.

Btw ....objective evidence in this field is hard to find

 

[calibob]

So are you stating then you would go to a wedding reception or not...because you seem to be straddling two lanes and I am finding it a bit confusing?

I'm saying I might or might not. There are a lot things and circumstances to consider. I don't think my presence or lack of will effect another's choice of lifestyle. Going wouldn't make me gay. What kind of reception and where? Is it family friendly? Are there mothers expected? I wouldn't set foot into a gay church. And if something made me uncomfortable or offended me I wouldn't hesitate to walk out. I definitely wouldn't go to a gay themed event. Gays don't offend me any more than Mormons do.

 

[UnderGrace]

It proves that biological responses associated with attraction are triggered in self-identified homosexual men whenever they see eroticized images of other men, but not when they see such images of women. Attraction is, of course, an innate, instinctive phenomenon. I don't see a woman and choose to be attracted to her, I am simply attracted to her. And this scientific study proves that the same is true for homosexual men as they view other men.

Again, that says nothing about faith, or politics, or any of that. It's just a scientific observation.

Again, the behaviour in which they have participated has changed their brain....brains are malleable and not static.

 

[UnderGrace]

I'm saying I might or might not. There are a lot things and circumstances to consider. I don't think my presence or lack of will effect another's choice of lifestyle. Going wouldn't make me gay. What kind of reception and where? Is it family friendly? Are there mothers expected? I wouldn't set foot into a gay church. And if something made me uncomfortable or offended me I wouldn't hesitate to walk out. I definitely wouldn't go to a gay themed event. Gays don't offend me any more than Mormons do.

No on has said going would make you gay, that is pretty funny though.

Glad you clarified.

 

[Ohm]

Btw ....objective evidence in this field is hard to find

I agree, it has historically been politically loaded. However, the above study is pretty conclusively showing that gay men do have innat biological responses to a specific gender, to the exclusion of the other. That much is clear.

I think if we are going to have an intellectually honest discussion then it's important to recognize where science ends and politics begins. One is robust and testable, and the other is entirely subjective.

 

[Magenta]

great and so does my Cuzin and my mother and my sister

I do not know your cousin, mother, or sister, or why you mention them. Jesus said, "Whoever does God's will is my brother and sister and mother." God's revealed written Word also says He wants us to love kindness, and that it is His loving kindness that draws us to repentance.

 

[Ohm]

Again, the behaviour in which they have participated has changed their brain....brains are malleable and not static.

Again, agreed. It's called neuroplasticity, and it means that brainwave patterns and neural pathways can be altered in response to stimuli, environment, brain chemistry and thought processes. That said, they can also be altered by brainwashing, torture, and abuse. Neuroplastic changes can be a result of wanted and active participation or they can be a result of oppressive practices/confinement/abuse/violence etc.

But what this study shows is that, for gay people, there's an instinctive neurological correlate for their attraction tendencies, similar to that which straight people experience.